Polypyrrole-Coated Capillary Coupled to HPLC for In-Tube Solid-Phase Microextraction and Analysis of Aromatic Compounds in Aqueous Samples
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In-tube solid-phase microextraction (SPME) based on a polypyrrole (PPY)-coated capillary was investigated for the extraction of aromatic compounds from aqueous solutions. The PPY-coated capillary was coupled on-line to HPLC that was programmed with an autosampler to achieve automated in-tube SPME and HPLC analysis. Three groups of aromatics, including both polar and nonpolar compounds, were examined. The results demonstrated that the PPY coating had a higher extraction efficiency than the currently used commercial capillary coatings, especially for polycyclic aromatic compounds and polar aromatics due to the increasing pi-pi interactions, interactions by polar functional groups, and hydrophobic interactions between the polymer and the analytes. In addition to the functional groups in the PPY coating, which contributed to the higher extraction efficiency and selectivity toward analytes, the coating's porous surface structure,which was revealed by electron microscopy experiments, provided a high surface area that allowed for high extraction efficiency. It was found that the extraction efficiency and selectivity could be tuned by changing the coating thickness. The preliminary study of the extraction mechanism indicated that analytes were extracted onto the PPY coating mainly by an adsorption mechanism. The method was used for the extraction and analysis of both polar and nonpolar aromatics in aqueous samples.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it